politics

my hottest take is that society can run on voluntary taxes if we align incentives properly and make the process transparent

incentivizing things @ poidh.xyz - come chill /poidh + follow @poidhbot

I love the optimistic outlook, I wish I felt that way. Please explain how these outcomes will not happen, 1- the desires of those without money will take precedence over others, and 2- the “issue of the day” will win the funds (as happened in 2020 when a huge % of philanthropic giving went to BLM, not in addition to but at the expense of other needs (medical research, the poor, etc.). We now know the disappointing impact those funds had.

I have opinions and I’m willing to share them.

I mean that it is basically the same system that we have now but probably with smaller receipts. Those paying the largest amount of taxes will get the result that they desire. If you have enough money to voluntarily pay as much as you like you’ll be able to buy the outcome. Whether it’s mandatory or voluntary, those that put the most in will get the most out. One could argue now that most people just pay taxes as a fact of life and get on with it. I have often felt that I wouldn’t mind paying taxes if I could choose where my money would go,but you really can’t,  so the best you could hope for was to elect someone who saw it the way you did. Now with the country split 50/50 and screaming with hair on fire about every move from the other side, would we have a situation that only 50% would pay taxes depending on who is in office? Like I said, I like your optimism, I just don’t think it’s plausible.

1. wait did you mean the desires of those WITH money will take precedence?

2. issue of the day already wins out with funding in our current system, politicians don't rationally spend taxpayer funds, they do so in the way that is most likely to get them reelected (and their constituents don't rationally choose who they elect based on actions completed, they act emotionally)